If self, in its journies through different lives, cannot
remain without some activity, and if our activities are prone to
generate various types of karmas, what should one be advised to
do : can he stop his activities ? If he cannot, how can he escape
the earning of fresh karmas, because every activity in this
Samsara would bring in fresh karmic bondages, and one can hardly
expect to be totally free from the cycle of births and deaths.

The legitimacy of these questions is beyond doubt. Key to the
solution is, however, found in the enquiry as to what is that
which attracts the karmic Pudgalas ? We have already noticed that
our deeds are prompted by our intentions known as Bhavas',
and that the duration and the intensity of our karmas depend
mainly upon the intensity of the feelings, Bhavas', with
which they are done. It follows that if we do a particular act
objectively, honestly, and without being subjectively involved in
the fruits there of, our Bhavas (feelings) in doing the same the
neutralized and the bondage of such karmas, if any, becomes
superficial. Life is action and so action is unavoidable so long
as life persists. But action without attachment is as good as
no-action' - a situation which is known as Akarma' in
Gita'. Sthitaprajna' of Gita is the ideal of human
beings in action. None of the Indian systems of philosophical
thoughts has shunned the duties which one owes to his family, his
society or his nation or to the humanity at large. What is
shunned is doing the same with expectations. Almost all the
Tirthankaras (Prophets) of Jainas hailed from the warrior class
called Ksartiyas. Many of them were Cakravartins (emperors) who
had fought bitter wars. But when they retired they could achieve
their goal of total liberation. They could not have achieved this
had they not remained detached while rulings as Cakravartins, as
also while fighting wars. King Janaka, the father of Sita
supplies the brilliant example of how one can even rule a kingdom
without attachment. Action without attachment is, therefore, not
unknown to Indian culture. Hence the Jainism, like other Indian
philosophical systems, does not insist that renunciation of the
worldly affairs is a sine quanon of liberation from Karmic
bondage.